If PS users break down into three main categories, as I think they generally do:

1 - Large corporations and multi license users, with constant upgrades to the latest versions across all platforms. Substantially the largest group size.

2 - Home/small business and amateur photographers with single user licenses, with upgrades when they can afford it. Unknown group size.

3 - Pirated/hacked illegal users of PS with no intention of ever buying a license, yet with almost immediate access to the latest versions across all platforms. Anyone who cares to Google to find the URL of a torrent/download website.

If Adobe has now changed its PS delivery and licensing method to cater more for the requirements of group 1, as this is the targeted market PS was always supposed to be aimed at, but in so doing was fully aware it would alienate a large proportion of group 2, which way does Adobe think group 2 will now migrate towards the next time they want to upgrade, group 1 or group 3?

I think the next five years will see Group 2 increasingly migrate to a new Group 4, composed of former longtime Photoshop users who use an ever-growing number of rapidly developing alternative applications. In even three years, the Photoshop-alternative landscape will look nothing like what we see today.

What if the subscription software reverted to CS6 functionality when the subscription expires? That would take care of the proprietary Adobe file obsolescence problem as computer hardware and operating systems change. That seems to be what many, including myself, are upset about. You'd have to occasionally subscribe (frequency to be determined) for some period of time (number of months to be determined) in order to update your software, which seems perfectly fair. That subscription period would also give you a taste of the new features and tools available in the subscription version so you could determine if it's worthwhile. Seems like a good marketing feature for Adobe too. You wouldn't receive any new functionality if you don't continue the subscription, but assuming the total cost of the minimum subscription was reasonable that's also fair. A subscription model is fine if you don't hold everyone's previously created files hostage, and as I understand it that's exactly what Adobe plans to do at present.

What if the subscription software reverted to CS6 functionality when the subscription expires? That would take care of the proprietary Adobe file obsolescence problem as computer hardware and operating systems change.

What happens when computer operating systems evolve such that CS6 becomes unusable legacy software? I already have software I use, which the developers will not update, that is compatible with Mac OSX 10.6.8 but not 10.7+. The provision for long-term access to our files needs to be more forward-looking than CS6.

What happens when computer operating systems evolve such that CS6 becomes unusable legacy software? I already have software I use, which the developers will not update, that is compatible with Mac OSX 10.6.8 but not 10.7+. The provision for long-term access to our files needs to be more forward-looking than CS6.

What I'm talking about here is the subscription software, that works on whatever the current hardware and operating systems are, and "dumbs down" to CS6 functionality, not CS6 itself. There are a several ways this could be done, including reverting to a separate "CS6" program that has OS/hardware updates only. Your subscription would get all of the latest functionality while the subscription was paid, and would revert to CS6 functionality, but with updates that would allow it to work on current systems when you stop paying. Essentially, what you paid during the subscription period would be the price of the "upgrade" for hardware and OS compatibility.

What happens when computer operating systems evolve such that CS6 becomes unusable legacy software? I already have software I use, which the developers will not update, that is compatible with Mac OSX 10.6.8 but not 10.7+. The provision for long-term access to our files needs to be more forward-looking than CS6.

Of course that's an Apple OS problem and not one for us Windows users!

I think the easier way of doing this is simply to provide users (either free or for a fee) a perpetual license to the most current Photoshop configuration they have on their computers at the end of a subscription contract should they elect to not renew it. I don't see Adobe going to a lot of trouble over more elaborate schemes. Clearly not the mindset - at least for now. Arguing them back to something reasonable needs to be the easiest, least-cost approach conceivable if it is to work.

Of course that's an Apple OS problem and not one for us Windows users!

Cummon Alan - I used to use Windows also ya know. I have applications that are XP-compliant , not 7 or 8 compliant and the vendor won't upgrade them. I need to maintain an old Toshiba laptop to access them. Ugh. :-)

Cummon Alan - I used to use Windows also ya know. I have applications that are XP-compliant , not 7 or 8 compliant and the vendor won't upgrade them. I need to maintain an old Toshiba laptop to access them. Ugh. :-)

Microsoft provides Windows XP Virtual Machine free of charge for W7/8. I have been using a laser printer purchased in 1999, which only has Windows XP driver, without problems on my W7 box.

Very interesting: now here is one for you (and sorry if a bit OT - but a good opportunity). I have Windows 7 Professional already running as a VM under Parallels 8 in Mac OSX 10.6.8. So, any idea whether I could run Windows XP mode as a VM within the Windows 7 VM under Parallels on a Mac? :-) Whew.

Alan and Mark, that's a great idea! Let's add a Mac/Windows discussion to this thread! Can't get any hotter ;-)

Yes, I agree, throwing in a Mac-Windows pissing-match on top of a CC-perpetual license flap is exactly what we need to spice-up life on a rainy Sunday, but we're just about off to enjoy Mother's Day, so I'll pass on the opportunity to pursue the "Mother of All LULA Debates".

Very interesting: now here is one for you (and sorry if a bit OT - but a good opportunity). I have Windows 7 Professional already running as a VM under Parallels 8 in Mac OSX 10.6.8. So, any idea whether I could run Windows XP mode as a VM within the Windows 7 VM under Parallels on a Mac? :-) Whew.

In theory, that should work without any problems. But, the real catch is performance in that kind scenario, I would think. I haven't used MAC since left college in 80s and can't really answer your question specifically.

Thanks guys. I have the Windows capability on a Macbook Pro (used largely for my consulting work) that has 8GB of RAM, Intel Cor i7 (2 Core) 2.66 GHz processor and two SSDs, so it should be quite efficient.

What happens when computer operating systems evolve such that CS6 becomes unusable legacy software? I already have software I use, which the developers will not update, that is compatible with Mac OSX 10.6.8 but not 10.7+. The provision for long-term access to our files needs to be more forward-looking than CS6.

That point's been bugging me ever since I started shooting Raw, the reason of which is to preserve non-destructive parametric edits on thousands of images the user owns on top of owning the parametric edits which represents the user's time and creative efforts.

The only solution is to come up with a computer specifically built for photographers with its own OS that doesn't need updating and whose hardware can be replaced with the same compatible components that will preserve and allow further processing on those saved parametric edits years on end.

I think it's safe to assume now that there isn't going to be much useful innovation in technology for photographers regarding Raw processing that requires constantly upgrading and updating to get the latest, greatest wizbang features unless they come up with a "Make my Raw image look glorious" button which I'm not holding my breath on that ever happening.

The current OS's are engineered to accommodate all types of users with all sorts of needs and workflows which most likely is the cause for constant updating and upgrading of hardware and software.

Think about it. Do you want to subscribe to a service that, if you choose to stop the subscription at any time later in life, you will lose the capability to further edit those images with Photoshop? That is what I understand the terms of Adobe's new Creative Cloud to be.

After an introductory 12 month period, do you really want to be on the hook for $20.00 per month - the rate if you now own CS3 or later - for the rest of your life (plus increases at Adobe's discretion) to be able to edit your photo files?

I can see where this might be beneficial to graphics businesses that have multiple employees and using more CS applications than Photoshop. But individual photographers? Even we so-called "hobbyists"?

And what about third parties like authors, trainers, or organizations like National Association of Photoshop Professionals? I just cancelled my NAPP membership. If I stay with CS6 I don't need NAPP.

I'm thinking that Mephistopheles must be lurking the halls in Adobe's headquarters building.